5S€> 


a 


vr&frt 


University  Library 
University  of  California  •  Berkeley 


SILVER  NOT  A  LOCAL,  ISSUE. 


SPEECH 


HON.  DARWIN  R.  JAMES 


OF    2>TE:^*7-    YORK. 


In  the  House  of  Representatives, 


March  20,  1886. 


WASHINGTON,  D.  C. 

R.  O.  POLKINHORN,  PRINTER. 

1886. 


SILVER  NOT  A  LOCAL  ISSUE. 


SPEECH 


OP 


Hon.  Darwin  'R.  James: 


o^  istzetkt  ^ztotitz:. 


PLAIN  WORDS  FROM  A  PLAIN  MAN  FOR  PLAIN  PEOPLE. 


The  House  having  under  consideration  H.  Pw.  5690,  for  the  Free  Coinage  of 
Silver  &c,  upon  the  adverse  report  of  the  majority  of  the  Committee  on  Coin- 
age, Weights  and  Measures,  (presented  "by  Mr.  James  for  the  Committee  on 
February  10, 1886.)— 

Mr.  JA.MES  said:  Mr.  Speaker,  before  I  enter  upon  the  subject  of 
debate  I  desire  to  say  a  few  words  in  way  of  personal  explanation. 

I  am  a  business  man.  I  am  not  a  lawyer  nor  a  professor,  neither 
has  my  life  been  closely  interwoven  with  the  interests  of  practical  poli- 
tics, but  I  have  attended  to  the  business  of  a  merchant.  But  I  do  not 
deem  it  presumptuous  that  I  regard  my  mandate  from  my  constit- 
uents in  Brooklyn  to  be  a  member  of  this  body,  and  my  mandate  from 
the  Speaker  of  this  House  to  serve  on  the  Committee  on  Coinage, 
"Weights,  and  Measures  as  a  warrant  for  taking  the  time  of  the  House 
in  setting  forth  my  views  on  the  subject  now  under  consideration. 

People  are  more  wont  to  look  to  the  lawyer,  to  the  professor,  and  to 
the  political  leader  for  light  on  these  questions  than  to  plain,  business 
men.  But  unfortunately,  Mr.  Speaker,  this  habit  of  looking  to  the 
lawyers,  the  professors,  and  the  recognized  political  leaders  does  not 
seem  to  have  produced  good  results  in  this  matter  of  the  coinage  of 
the  silver  dollar.  We  have  tried  it  for  eight  years,  and  here  we  are 
now  in  a  slough.  How  are  we  to  get  out  oi  it  ?  This  is  the  ques- 
tion. The  car  of  state  is  very  nearly  being  ditched.  It  is  not  a  ques- 
tion of  making  good  time  on  the  road,  it  is  a  question  of  getting  the 
wheels  out  of  the  slough.  It  is  a  question  of  making  salvage  that  is 
before  the  Committee  on  Coinage,  Weights,  and  M3asures  and  this 
House.  What  are  we  to  do  about  it  ?  This  is  as  far  as  the  country 
has  advanced  on  the  silver  question.  Things  have  gone  on  from 
bad  to  worse,  and  this  is  the  outcome  of  the  leadership  of  the  lawyers, 
the  professors,  and  the  authorized  leaders  of  politics. 

These  circumstances,  Mr.  Speaker,  have  convinced  me  that  I  ought 
to  take  a  hand  in  the  debate.  Without  laying  claim  to  anything  par- 
ticularly meritorious  I  may  at  least  claim  to  be  heard.    I  have  all  the 


more  reason  for  this  from  the  fact  that  the  monetary  question  is  pecu- 
liarly a  business  question.  On  final  analysis,  the  monetary  question 
is  a  question  of  prices,  a  matter  of  buying  and  selling  ;  and  so  it  is,  as 
I  have  said,  peculiarly  a  business  question. 

Then,  again,  Mr.  Speaker,  I  ask  the  attention  of  this  House  to  what 
I  have  to  say  because  the  business  men  of  the  country  are,  after  all, 
a  very  numerous  and  influential  class.  They  need  awakening  ;  they 
need  it  in  my  district,  they  need  it  in  your  district.  Gentlemen,  I  am 
afraid  we  shall  find  that  they  need  it  in  all  of  our  districts. 

I  wish  to  be  entirely  frank  about  this  matter.  I  am  afraid  that  the 
business  men  of  the  country  have  not  been  doing  their  duty  to  the 
country.  They  have  been  buying  and  selling  and  have  let  high  poli- 
tics alone,  even  when  high  politics  affected  them  most  seriously.  In 
this  they  have  failed  in  their  duty  to  themselves  as  well  as  to  the  country. 

I  have  no  doubt  that  if  the  business  men  had  had  the  power  to  deal 
with  the  silver  question  the  team  of  State  would  not  have  been  stalled  in 
the  mire  as  it  is  now,  and  it  is  largely  their  fault  that  it  is  so,  for  they 
knew  what  the  end  would  be.  They  should  have  spoken  out  from  one 
end  of  the  country  to  the  other  ;  they  should  have  insisted  that  their 
advice  be  followed.  If  I  speak,  therefore,  of  business  men  in  my  dis- 
trict, of  business  men  in  your  district,  business  men  in  all  of  our  dis- 
tricts needing  to  be  awakened,  I  do  it  for  the  purpose  of  urging  you, 
gentlemen  of  the  House,  to  talk  this  matter  over  with  them  as  you  see 
them,  and  to  elicit  expressions  of  opinion  from  them  upon  this  great 
and  far-reaching  subject.  I  think  this  comparison  of  views  will  do 
good. 

I  want  to  hear  from  the  sovereign  people  on  this  questtion  of  money 
legislation.  To  handle  this  question  wisely  and  to  the  best  interests 
of  all,  we  need  the  advice  of  the  men  of  business  in  our  constituencies. 
If  my  own  voice  could  reach  beyond  this  floor  I  would  gladly  see  to 
it  that  the  business  men  throughout  the  country  should  at  least  hear 
one  loud  call  to  join  their  forces  for  a  righteous  handling  of  this  great 
question.  If  we  could  accomplish  this,  enlightenment  and  instruction 
would  follow  a  discussion  so  general  amid  a  people  so  sensible  and 
so  practical  as  ours.  I  believe  we  should  be  practically  unanimous 
after  hearing  from  them  in  voting  a  measure  which  would  close  the 
current  chapters  of  the  history  of  compulsory  coinage.  "What  that 
measure  should  be  I  am  here  to  suggest. 

I  have  given  study  to  the  facts  which  make  the  theories  upon  this 
issue,  and  have  measured  the  measures  proposed  with  the  same  spirit 
of  determination  to  be  right  which  applied  to  my  own  business  while 
in  India,  where  I  handled  the  rupee,  or  in  New  York,  where  I  sold 
the  products  of  the  East.  The  result  may  be  summed  up  in  these 
words  :  the  so-called  demonetization  of  silver  has  been  from  the  start 
a  great  business  blunder. 

I  do  not  wish  to  be  misunderstood  by  either  the  extreme  gold  men 
on  one  side  or  the  extreme  silver  men  on  the  other,  in  my  use  of  this 
term.  I  speak  of  the  demonetization  of  silver.  They  may  presumably 
think  I  mean  the  anti-silver  law  passed  by  Congress  in  1873,  and  the 
revision  of  the  statutes  in  which  the  silver  dollar  was  spirited  away. 
I  do  not.  Perhaps  they  think  I  ought  to  mean  it  if  I  speak  of  de- 
monetization. I  do  not  think  so.  I  say  that  I  am  right  and  that 
they  are  wrong,  for  it  is  more  than  a  question  of  words,  Mr.  Speaker  ; 
it  is  a  question  of  ideas. 

In  the  first  place,  who  demonetized  silver  ?  My  friends  here  talk 
as  if  the  United  States  had  done  it. 

The  so-called  demonetization,  which  is  in  fact  only  an  effort  at  de- 
monetization (a  partial  outlawry  of  silver)  is  the  culmination  of  a  joint 


undertaking.  The  chief  quota  of  outlawry  belongs  to  the  nations  that 
controlled  most  silver  and  gold.  France  and  her  allies  of  the  bimetal- 
lic, free-coinage  union,  controlled  nearly  two-thirds  of  the  metallic 
money  of  Europe. 

With  their  alternative  free  coinage,  coining  all  that  came,  whether 
gold  or  silver,  at  an  express  valuation  by  weight,  they  held  the  par 
steady  for  generations.  England's  anti-silver  quota  had  been  sub- 
scribed and  paid  so  long  that  it  had  all  been  spent.  Germany's  quota 
to  the  fund  was  very  large ;  in  fact,  the  responsibility  for  the  evil  re- 
sults which  followed  demonetization  in  Europe  is  chargeable  to  the 
action  of  Germany. 

After  the  capture  of  Paris,  in  1871,  a  series  of  anti-silver  and  pro- 
gold  laws  were  enacted,  followed  in  1873  by  direct  acts  of  calling  in 
silver  coin  to  be  sent  to  the  melting  pot,  and  thence  to  the  bullion  mar- 
ket. France  saw  that  if  she  continued  the  coinage  of  silver  she  was 
simply  "  bulling  "  the  market  for  German  silver,  and  was  paying  out 
gold  for  a  metal  that  would  become  a  burden  to  her  if  Germany's  ac- 
tion should  be  followed  by  other  nations.  She  therefore  stopped  its 
coinage.  The  action  of  France  was  thought  to  be  necessary,  but  it 
was  very  unfortunate.  She  felt  that  she  could  not  afford  (by  keeping 
her  mints  open  to  silver)  to  enable  Germany  to  transmute  her  stock  of 
silver  into  gold,  taking  French  gold  for  demonetized  German  silver. 
It  was  not  agreeable  to  France  to  "bull"  silver  for  Germany's  benefit, 
and  face  the  uncertainties  of  the  monetary  future  with  the  added  bur- 
den to  carry  off  the  rejected  silver  of  Germany. 

It  was  said  in  1870  by  a  leading  statesman  in  Europe,  Feer-Herzog, 
that  the  anti-silver  campaign  is  like  a  steeple- chase — those  that  demon- 
etize first  will  win  the  prize,  and  those  that  come  later  will  pay  for  all 
the  demonetization  that  has  preceded  theirs.  Each  was,  therefore,  in 
a  hurry  to  demonetize  for  fear  the  other  would  demonetize  first;  each 
afraid  to  keep  up  silver  coinage  because  the  other  rejected  it.  The 
impetus  giyen  by  Germany's  attack  was  passed  along  the  line,  and  one 
after  the  other  of  the  mints  of  Europe  was  closed  to  silver.  Now, 
when  I  say  this  was  a  business  blunder  I  do  not  say  that  it  was  a  blun- 
der of  each  nation  acting  by  itself  and  with  the  sole  alternative  of 
keeping  up  free  coinage  within  its  own  borders  for  all  the  silver  that 
might  come,  or,  on  the  other,  of  closing  its  mints.  If  it  had  been  a 
simple  choice  between  these  two  courses  there  would  seem  to  have 
been  no  way  other  than  to  stop. 

As  the  case  was  presented  to  France  in  1874  and  to  Holland  in  1875 
it  was  the  only  safe  alternative  to  be  pursued.  There  are  occasions  in 
one's  business  experience  when  the  question  arises,  "  Shall  we  sell  or 
hold?"  Our  neighbors,  like  ourselves,  are  loaded  with  the  same  ar- 
ticle; if  we  sell  it  is  at  a  sacrifice;  if  we  hold  there  is  a  loss;  but  if  we 
combine  and  arrange  we  can  all  sell  at  a  profit. 

But'suppose  you  can  not  arrange,  or  think  you  can  not,  and  there- 
fore do  not  try,  what  is  the  result?  You  force  sales;  the  bottom  is 
knocked  out  of  the  market,  and  down  goes  the  price.  It  was  a  great 
blunder  of  the  nations  as  a  whole,  and  it  was  a  blunder  of  each  single 
nation  in  so  far  as  that  single  nation  could  have  stopped  the  ruinous 
course  of  all.  No  one  nation  could  afford  to  have  the  others  unload 
upon  it.  In  point  of  fact  there  was  neither  sense  or  reason  in  any  na- 
tion trying  to  unload.  It  was  a  blunder  to  try;  each  nation  as  it  closed 
its  mints  to  silver  helped  to  depreciate  the  stock  of  silver  coin  it  had 
on  hand,  helped  to  render  the  money-basis  of  its  valuations  insecure, 
and  helped  to  re-enforce  the  momentum  of  Germany's  attack  on  the 
stability  of  the  existing  valuations  of  property  throughout  the  world. 


The  result  was  insecurity,  uneasiness  in  the  money  markets,  and  a 
great  check  to  business  activity. 

I  am  aware  that  there  has  been  a  widespread  habit  of  ignoring  these 
facts.  It  was  fashionable,  so  to  speak,  at  one  time  to  shout  for  the 
single  gold  standard  and  for  the  demonetization  of  silver.  Those  who 
did  the  shouting  do  not  much  care  at  this  time  to  be  known.  For 
several  years  they  tried  to  conceal  the  harm  they  produced  but  they 
could  not.  The  facts  are  against  them.  The  business  of  Europe  was 
done  with  both  metals;  by  legislative  enactment  one  is  stricken  down 
and  becomes  non  exportable  except  as  bullion.  Now,  who  will  pre- 
sume to  maintain  that  a  country  like  Holland  can  do  business  as  easily 
and  successfully  with  its  twenty  millions  of  gold,  full  weight  and  ex- 
portable, and  eighty  millions  of  non-exportable,  because  depreciated, 
token  money,  as  with  one  hundred  millions  of  full  weight  exportable 
money?  To  depreciate  the  scope  of  that  eighty  millions  or,  in  other 
words,  to  strike  it  with  lameness,  was  bad  business.  Yet  Germany 
and  France  had  forced  Holland  into  this  position,  and  so  she  stopped 
coining  silver  and  took  to  coining  gold,  doing  what  she  could  to  in- 
crease her  stock  of  this  metal. 

The  outlawry  of  silver  in  Europe  reduced  a  thousand  millions  of  sil- 
ver to  the  condition  of  inexportable,  non- international,  depreciated 
money,  in  other  words,  to  the  condition  of  tokens  which  are  a  burden 
to  the  state  and  to  the  business  community.  Now,  all  this  never 
would  have  occurred  if  there  had  not  been  anti-silver  laws.  Had  it 
not  been  for  these  there  would  have  been  no  depreciation  of  silver. 
Hence  it  is  I  say  that  the  outlawry  of  silver  was  an  immense  business 
blunder  and  a  great  business  loss  "for  each  nation  affected  by  it.  The 
story  of  the  last  ten  years  «in  Europe  is  a  story  of  business  depression 
unexampled  in  history,  and  the  main  cause  of  the  depression  lies  where 
any  business  man  can  see  it  if  he  takes  the  trouble  to  look,  namely,  in 
the  series  of  laws  in  the  different  states  of  Europe  artificially  contract- 
ing the  metallic  basis  of  valuations  and  making  insecure  a  foundation 
which  should  have  been  solid. 

Gentlemen,  do  you  want  evidence  of  these  facts?  I  doubt  if  you  do. 
The  history  of  these  ten  years  in  each  country  is  one  of  business  crip- 
pled, of  marking  down  of  prices,  and  suffering  in  every  direction. 
You  know  how  it  has  been  in  our  own  country  and  can  imagine  how 
it  has  been  in  other  countries.  Take  England  as  a  sample  for  Europe 
and  read  Thorold  Rogers  and  Robert  G  iff  en  in  1879  (Document  of  Con- 
ference of  1878).  Read  Mr.  Goschen's  address  in  Manchester  in  July, 
1885,  and  Robert  Giffen  in  Contemporary  Review  for  June,  1885;  also, 
recall  the  fact  that  a  royal  commission  is  to-day  investigating  the  cause 
of  the  depression  of  trade.  What  it  all  means  for  Germany  is  plainly 
stated  by  Baron  vop  Mpbach  in  an  address  from  which  I  shall  quote 
later. 

But  permit  me,  Mr.  Speaker,  to  bore  a  little  deeper  into  the  facts. 
Let  us  look  at  the  state  of  affairs  in  Europe  as  a  whole.  We  see  the 
nations  of  Europe  engaged  in  a  sort  of  monetary  war,  each  nation  lay- 
ing an  embargo  upon  the  silver  coin  of  other  nations  and  u  pon  new 
silver  from  the  mines.  A  state  of  affairs  is  thus  produced  which  is 
expensive  to  their  treasuries  and  injurious  to  the  industries  and  the 
trade  of  each  What  is  the  cause?  Practically  the  start  was  made  by 
Germany,  and  it  was  a  monetary  continuance  of  the  invasion  of  France. 
The  action  of  Germany  forced  the  Latin  Union  to  adopt  the  German 
embargo  on  silver;  it  forced  Holland  to  do  the  same  thing,  and  France's 
embargo  forced  Germany  to  give  up  her  sales  of  silver  iu  1879.  I  desire 
to  make  this  thought  clear.  This  anti-silver  movement  practically  in- 
volves national  hostilities,  national  pride. 


But  let  us  go  one  step  further  and  ask  how  it  came  about  that  Ger- 
many forced  Europe  into  this  embargo. 

Here  we  touch  upon  a  vast  question.  Who  can  measure  all  the  in- 
formation and  prejudice  of  the  savants  who  sought  to  control  national 
action  ?  About  the  time  of  our  war  a  "  craze  "  seemed  to  take  hold  of 
the  economists,  and  it  became  fashionable  to  be  an  anti- silver  man,  an 
anti  bimetallist,  a  gold  single-standard  man. 

This  is  the  gist  of  the  facts.  You  can  read  the  story  in  the  books  of 
the  conferences  from  1867  to  1881.  Now,  we  have  heard  repeatedly 
from  the  extreme  silver  men  that  this  anti-silver  movement  has  been 
and  is  a  great,  conspiracy  of  the  creditor  class,  of  the  bondholders  of  the 
civilized  nations,  and  that  they  worked  up  this  sentiment  for  selfish 
ends.  Such  is  not  the  truth.  The  professors  of  political  economy  who 
directed  the  thought  of  a  generation,  were  not  what  is  called  "the 
servile  hirelings  of  bloated  bondholders."  These  men  thought  they 
were  reformers,  and  they  meant  well :  but  their  foresight  was  incorrect 
They  made  a  mistake.  The  outcome  of  their  work  was  an  enormous 
business  loss  which  they  had  not  foreseen,  and  was  consequently  a 
great  business  blunder. 

The  end  is  not  yet.  "We  are  only  in  the  midst  of  this  craze,  which, 
as  has  been  well  said,  was  the  outcome  of  scientific  error,  re-enforced 
by  national  pride,  and  uniting  the  chief  nations  of  Europe  in  a  joint 
attack  upon  silver.  Now,  how  is  this  movement  to  be  reversed  ?  It  is 
a  great  question;  those  who  have  carefully  studied  the  reports  of  the  two 
international  conferences  called  by  the  United  States  can  form  an  idea 
of  the  extent  and  intricacy  of  the  subject.  People  talk  of  the  lack  of 
success  of  those  conferences.  They  do  not  comprehend  how  vast  a 
matter  we  were  trying  to  handle  ;  nor  do  they  comprehend  the  innu- 
merable difficulties  in  the  way  arising  from  national  pride,  blind  sel- 
fishness, and  a  reluctance  to  being  taught,  which  the  commissioners 
had  to  meet. 

Now,  let  me  turn  to  the  question,  how  has  our  coinage  of  the  silver 
dollar  operated  upon  Europe  ? 

I  affirm  with  certainty  that  it  has  operated  injuriously  to  the  success 
of  the  effort  to  restore  bimetallic  free  coinage.  There  is  one  thing,  Mr. 
Speaker,  which  we  may  take  for  granted:  there  is  a  good  deal  of 
human  nature  in  Europe  as  well  as  in  America — Europeans  are  men, 
and  they  are  not  devoid  of  sense.  If  you  or  I  were  European  and  lived 
in  the  midst  of  prejudice  as  general  as  that  which  induced  the  poli- 
ticians of  European  nations  to  commit  themselves  to  an  anti  silver 
policy,  and  when  those  great  bodies,  which  move  so  slowly,  had  already 
moved  and  taken  a  stand,  I  think  we  should  consider  it  a  very  pleasant 
thing  if  a  powerful  and  wealthy  nation  across  the  sea  would  take  hold 
and  help  us  out  without  asking  any  help  in  return. 

The  coinage  of  silver  by  the" United  States  eased  up  the  situation  for 
the  gold  monometallists  of  Europe.  The  statesmen  who  committed 
themselves  and  their  countries  to  monometallism  found  allies  in  the 
United  States,  and  of  this  number  not  one  more  efficient  than  the  gen- 
tleman from  Missouri  [Mr.  Bland].  Outside  of  what  the  coinage  of 
silver  has  been  doing  all  the  time,  it  has  been  a  constant  promise  for 
the  future  that  they  are  to  be  "let  out"  more  completely.  I  can  not 
understand,  Mr.  Speaker,  why  the  extreme  silver  men  fail  to  see  that 
they  are  really  the  cat's-paws  of  European  monometallists.  I  do  not  use 
the  word  in  any  way  offensively — but  it  is  strong,  in  so  far  as  they 
seem  to  be  picking  the  chestnuts  out  of  the  fire.  Perhaps  there  may  be 
a  tinge  of  blind  self-interest  in  the  ground  they  take,  or,  if  that  does 
not  suit,  let  us  suppose  that  they  have  found  the  silver  question  a  much 
more  momentous  one  than  they  have  hitherto  contemplated  and  do  not 


6 

now  care  to  face  it  in  all  its  diverse  bearings.  Perhaps  they  have 
thought  that  silver  is  a  "local  issue,"  as  a  certain  distinguished  gen- 
tleman once  remarked  with  reference  to  the  tariff.  If  so,  they  were 
again  mistaken . 

It  is  more  than  a  local  issue,  it  is  an  international  one,  and  it  is  be- 
cause the  silver  men  have  failed  to  comprehend  this  fact  that  they  have 
gone  on  in  their  blind,  selfish  advocacy  of  a  financial  policy  which  has 
operated  as  disastrously  at  home  as  it  has  abroad,  and  which  threatens 
at  this  moment  to  strike  down  with  paralysis  the  commercial  and  in- 
dustrial interests  of  the  country. 

With  these  views  and  under  these  circumstances  I  do  not  hesitate  to 
say  that  the  coinage  under  the  Bland  act  has  been  from  the  beginning 
and  is  now  a  colossal  business  blunder.  The  advocates  of  the  measure 
proposed  and  expected  it  to  restore  the  price  of  silver,  but  it  has 
steadily  declined  as  compared  with  gold  from  an  average  price  of  52 
§-16d.  per  ounce  in  1878  to  an  average  of  48  9-lQd.  in  1885,  and  at 
this  time  it  is  quoted  in  London  an  46-£d.  per  ounce.  Such  are  the 
facts,  and  here  we  are  with  the  silver  question  still  on  our  hands. 

If  it  had  not  been  for  the  passage  of  the  Bland  bill  in  1878, 1  believe 
that  long  ere  this  silver  would  have  been  remonetized  in  Europe,  and 
that  both  in  Europe  and  the  United  States  the  mints  would  have  been 
open  to  the  free  coinage  of  silver  as  they  are  to  gold,  and  that  the  two 
metals  would  have  been  at  a  parity  one  to  the  other  at  a  fixed  ratio,  as 
agreed  upon. 

The  true  friends  of  silver,  the  people  who  want  silver  restored  to  its 
proper  place  relatively  to  gold,  as  it  was  before  its  outlawry  in  Europe 
began,  all  recognize  this.  They  have  said  it  in  print  continually.  The 
European  bimetallists  have  fought  a  good  fight ;  they  have  been  in 
battle  array  all  these  years  fighting  for  the  cause  of  silver. 

But  during  these  years  they  have  said  and  felt  that  the  men  in  the 
United  States  who  desire  to  keep  up  a  local  silver  coinage  when  other 
nations  have  stopped  are  the  enemies  of  bimetallism.  Our  bimetallist 
friends  are  there  carrying  on  a  tight  against  stupidity  in  high  places, 
and  those  who  ought  to  be  their  friends,  who  claim  to  be  their  friends, 
are  all  the  time  encouraging  their  enemies  to  hold  out,  encouraging 
them  with  present  help  and  with  promises  for  the  future  ;  in  fact, 
many  of  these  men  who  called  themselves  bimetallists  have  now 
thrown  off  the  mask  and  are  pronounced  silver  monometallists, 
and  demand  free  coinage.  Now,  Mr.  Speaker,  these  European  bi- 
metallists are  the  men  beside  whom  we  ought  to  stand  and  with  whom 
we  ought  to  join  forces  ;  they  are  our  friends.  We  ought  to  help  them 
in  their  struggle  with  indifference  and  prejudice  in  high  places  and 
with  the  gold  monometallists  who  want  the  single  standard  through 
error  or  greed. 

To  do  this  we  must  follow  the  advice  of  those  who  know  something 
about  the  importance  of  the  international  side  of  the  controversy,  and 
suspend  the  coinage  of  silver,  in  order  that  we  may  help  our  European 
bimetallist  friends  to  accomplish  that  which  is  of  paramount  import- 
ance to  us — namely,  the  remonetization  of  silver  in  Europe.  But 
why  have  we  not  done  this  ?  Because  our  people  have  not  understood 
the  question.  The  silver  mine  owners,  in  their  greed  for  present  gains, 
have  not  looked  to  the  future.  They  have  been  content  to  take  the  best 
price  they  could  get  for  their  bullion  on  a  declining  market  rather  than 
wait  until  international  bimetallism  is  restored,  when  their  profits 
would  be  largely  increased.  They  have  kept  up  a  cry  against  bond- 
holders and  the  "  gold-bugs"  of  New  York  whereby  they  have  deceived 
the  people  ;  they  have  flooded  the  country  with  their  publications,  and 
have  had,  as  they  have  now,  large  sums  of  money  at  their  disposal  for 


manipulating  public  sentiment;  in  fact,  they  are  thoroughly  organized, 
with  a  headquarters  in  this  city. 

The  true  friends  of  bimetallism  are  undoubtedly  largely  in  the  ma- 
jority, but  they  are  scattered  and  are  fighting  at  odds  against  an  organ- 
ized force.  But  I  predict  that  it  will  be  as  it  was  in  the  days  of  the 
"greenback  craze,"  that  when  the  people  come  to  understand  the 
question  they  will  speak  out  for  the  suspension  of  the  coinage  of  the 
standard  dollar  as  they  spoke  in  no  unerring  tone  at  the  period  to  which 
I  refer. 

It  may  be  that  they  will  not  learn  the  lesson  except  by  further  finan- 
cial disaster  consequent  upon  continued  coinage.  But,  under  any 
circumstances,  this  is  a  campaign  in  which  there  can  be  but  one  suc- 
cessful issue,  namely,  the  re-establishment  of  silver  in  its  proper  place 
relative  to  gold  through  international  agreement.  Until  this  is  ac- 
complished, there  must  be  no  surrender.  The  fight  must  be  main- 
tained. Coinage  under  the  Bland  law  must  be  suspended  entirely,  for 
to  continue  coinage  under  this  law  is  but  organized  chaos  for  the 
United  States. 

The  continuance  of  the  present  law  is  sure  to  thoroughly  disarrange 
the  monetary  system,  and  to  further  shake  public  confidence.  It  is  the 
very  indefiniteness  of  the  continuance  of  coinage  without  concurrent 
coinage  in  Europe  that  so  completely  alarms  business  men  ;  and  I  say 
this  as  a  representative  of  the  business  interests  which  are  concen- 
trated in  and  around  New  York.  New  York  is  the  commercial  and 
financial  center  of  the  nation.  That  which  affects  the  business  inter- 
ests of  New  York,  affects  the  business  interests  of  the  entire  country, 
and  vice  versa. 

With  some  regret,  I  say  that  I  have  often  felt  chagrined  at  remarks 
made  upon  this  floor  concerning  New  York;  there  seems  to  be  an  im- 
pression that  her  interests  are  inimical  to  those  of  the  great  West  and 
South;  that  her  merchants  are  moved  largely  by  motives  of  narrow 
selfishness,  and  that  it  is  her  "bloated  bondholders"  who  are  the 
conspirators  against  silver  and  who  are  seeking  to  bring  about  the  single 
gold  standard  for  their  own  profit.  This  is  an  eminently  unfair  char- 
acterization. There  are  extreme  silver  men  in  New  York,  in  fact,  I 
see  it  charged  in  certain  metropolitan  journals  that  the  seat  of  the 
agitators  (I  do  not  use  the  word  conspirators)  for  free  and  unlimited 
silver  coinage  is  in  New  York.  Undoubtedly  there  are  extreme  gold 
men  there  also,  but  during  the  last  two  years  important  lessons  have 
been  learned,  the  subject  has  been  studied  in  the  light  of  new  experi- 
ence, and  to-day  New  York,  as  a  State,  is  pronouncedly  in  favor  of 
international  bimetallism. 

As  I  have  said,  New  York  has  studied  this  question  in  the  light  of 
events — and  New  York  stands  to-day  on  the  side  of  the  minority  in 
Berlin  and  the  minority  in  London,  who  are  trying  to  get  the  majority 
to  surrender  the  citadel  of  the  single  gold  standard  and  so  to  establish 
international  bimetallism.  Remember,  gentlemen,  that  New  York  is 
a  great  city,  and  great  cities  sympathize  with  each  other  and  naturally 
look  at  many  things  in  the  same  way.  When  London  was  shouting 
for  gold,  Paris  for  gold,  Berlin  for  gold,  it  was  quite  natural  that  New 
York  should  also  shout  for  gold  I  regret  that  this  was  so,  and  think 
that  it  was  a  mistake,  but  it  was  a  very  natural  one. 

Now,  as  I  have  intimated,  the  great  mass  of  the  merchants  and 
bankers  are  international  bimetallists,  who  demand  that  silver  be  re- 
stored by  treaty  agreement  to  its  proper  place  in  relation  to  gold,  and 
these  men  will  not  be  satisfied  until  it  is  accomplished,  for  they  recog- 
nize it  as  the  only  true  solution  of  the  silver  problem.  They  recognize 
the  fact  that  a  gigantic  business  blunder  was  commited  when  silver 


8 

was  stricken  down  by  the  European  nations,  and  though  some  of  them 
may  at  the  time  have  thought  the  course  a  wise  one,  they  have  long 
since  repented  having  had  any  sympathy  with  it.  Gentlemen,  there 
can  be  no  general  prosperity  upon  a  sound  basis  in  this  country  until 
silver  is  restored  through  concurrent  action  of  the  nations  agreeing  to 
open  their  mints  once  more  to  free  coinage  at  a  fixed  ratio  with  gold. 
The  result  of  eight  years'  experience  has  shown  to  the  true  friends  of 
international  bimetallism  that  the  enactment  of  the  Blund  law  was  a. 
gigantic  mistake,  as  it  has  been  the  principle  hindrance  to  the  settle- 
ment  of  the  question  upon  a  broad  international  basis. 

Judge  Buckner,  of  Missouri,  who  served  six  terms  in  this  House, 
was  one  of  the  ablest  advocates  of  the  Bland  bill.  In  a  speech  made 
during  the  closing  days  of  the  Forty-eighth  Congress  he  said: 

Our  people  are  thoroughly  bimetallic,  and  will  never  he  content  with  a  mone- 
tary circulation  composed  exclusively  either  of  gold  or  silver.  Theirtraditiona- 
as  well  as  their  interesrs  demand  the.  use  of  both  metals— with  the  values  of 
each  regulated  at  such  ratio  as  that  neither  shall  he  degraded  to  the  condition 
of  a  mere  money  token,  and  both  shall  perform  their  part  in  the  commercial 
exchanges  of  the  world  on  terms  of  perfect  equality. 

This  can  only  be  done  by  the  concerted  action  of  the  chief  nations  of  Europe 
with  our  Government ;  and  to  bring  about  this  concert  of  action,  the  first  step 
must  1  e  taken  by  us,  and  that  step  should  be  to  suspend  the  operation  of  the 
silver  coinage  act  for  a  time,  in  whole  or  in  part,  and  at  once  enter  upon  ne- 
gotiations with  European  nations  to  establish  a  fixed  ratio  of  valuation  between 
the  two  metals,  and  open  their  mints  to  the  free  coinage  of  both  gold  and  silve* 
on  such  terms  as  may  be  agreed  upon.  If  we  pursue  our  present  policy  there 
is  nothing  more  certain  than  that  the  gap  between  the  market  value  of  the  two 
metals  will  continue  to  grow  wider  and  wider,  and  this  country  will  be  comr 
pelled  to  make  choice  between  gold  or  silver  monometallism.  I  would  regard 
either  as  a  great  calamity  to  this  country  and  the  world,  and  I  have  an  abiding 
conviction  that  the  present  is  an  opportune  period  for  taking  prompt  and  de- 
cisive action  on  this  important  question. 

As  a  business  man,  and  speaking  from  a  business  standpoint,  I  say 
that  proposition  is  a  sound  one.  But  I  desire  to  be  understood  that  I 
am  not  opposing  silver  ;  I  recognize  its  importance  with  gold  as  a  coin 
of  our  Government. 

I  have  more  confidence  in  it  than  the  distinguished  Senator  from 
Colorado  (Mr.  Teller1,  if  he  meant  what  he  is  reported  to  have  said 
in  his  speech  of  January  19.  His  words  are  as  follows:  "Suspension 
■will  degrade  silver  to  such  an  extent  that  it  will  cease  to  be  a  money 
metal." 

In  this  one  sentence  he  has  given  away  his  cause.  He  evidently  has 
no  respect  for  the  article.  In  his  view  the  only  thing  that  keeps  it  a 
money  metal  is  the  coining  of  two  million  Bland  dollars  per  month  1 
Preposterous ! 

If  silver  had  no  better  advocates  its  cause  would  be  lost.  What, 
cease  to  be  a  money  metal  when  Europe  holds  a  thousand  million  of  it 
as  full  legal  tender,  when  it  is  still  the  standard  of  Austria  and  Russia, 
and  when  all  Asia  uses  it  as  money,  whether  coined  or  not,  to  say 
nothing  of  Mexico,  Central  America,  and  most  of  the  countries  of 
South  America!  Silver,  had  it  a  voice,  might  well  cry,  "Save  me 
from  my  friends  !  "  if  they  be  such  as  the  Senator  from  Colorado. 

We  can  continue  the  present  anomalous  law  of  compulsory  coinage 
of  two  millions  per  month,  or  we  can  take  the  panacea  proposed  by 
the  honorable  member  from  Ohio  [Mr.  Warner],  permitting  the  hol- 
ders of  silver  bullion  of  standard  fineness  to  carry  it  to  the  Mint  and 
receive  therefore  Treasury  certificates,  or  the  plan  proposed  by  the 
honorable  Senator  from  Ohio  [Mr.  Sherman],  whereby  the  Secretary 
of  the  Treasury  is  authorized  to  purchase  not  less  than  2,000,000  nor 
more  than  4,000,000  ounces  of  silver  per  month,  of  standard  fineness* 


9 

for  which  coin  certificates  are  to  be  issued  on  the  cost  of  the  bullion ; 
we  can  continue  as  we  are,  or  adopt  either  of  the  above  plans,  or  any 
one  of  the  half  dozen  other  plans  proposed,  but,  in  my  judgment, 
they  are  all  but  temporary  expedients,  and  should  not  be  entertained 
by  the  Congress  of  the  United  States. 

Free  coinage  is  what  we  want  to  accomplish,  and  in  my  opinion  it 
can  only  be  done  through  the  medium  of  suspension.  So  long  as  this 
coinage  continues  and  uncertainty  exists  as  to  our  future  course,  so 
long  it  is  easy  for  European  statesmen  to  put  off  dealing  seriously  with 
the  question.  But  a  date  for  suspension  would,  as  has  already  been 
well  said,  serves  as  "  a  notice  to  quit." 

Opinion  in  Europe  is  reassuring  on  this  point.  In  Germany  the 
convention  of  agriculturists  had  repeatedly  discussed  the  silver  ques- 
tion in  its  general  assemblies,  and  expressed  itself  in  favor  of  the  in- 
ternational double  standard  as  being  in  the  interest  of  German  agricul- 
ture. During  the  past  year  the  distress  of  these  interests  became  so 
much  greater  that  the  executive  committee  of  the  convention  felt  it  to 
be  its  duty  to  address  an  earnest  petition  to  the  Diet,  and  a  resolution 
favoring  the  international  double  standard  was  passed  November  12. 

Up  to  January  11  of  this  year  petitions  for  the  "  establishment  of 
the  international  double  standard  under  guarantee  of  treaty  "  had  been 
sent  to  the  chancellor  and  to  the  Reichstag  from  two  hundred  and 
seventy-eight  agricultural  associations.  These  associations  (varying 
in  the  number  of  their  membership)  represented  all  parts  of  Germany. 
I  find  for  example,  that  all  the  provinces  of  Prussia  proper  were  rep- 
resented; all  the  provinces  of  Saxony,  Lubeck,  Hanover,  Anhalt, 
Westphalia,  Schleswig,  Holstein,  Wurtemburg,  Bavaria;  in  fact  all 
parts  of  Germany.  In  all  eight  hundred  petitions  had  come  to  the 
chancellor  and  the  Reichstag  up  to  a  recent  date  praying  for  the  inter- 
national double  standard.  That  the  pressure  in  Germany  is  very  strong 
we  are  getting  evidences  almost  daily.  On  January  22  a  remarkable 
speech  was  delivered  by  Finance  Minister  Scholz  before  the  Landtag. 
Among  other  things  he  said: 

I  have  therefore  observed  with  regret  how  wide  a  circle  has  been  drawn  into 
sympathy  with  this  agitation,  and  especially  that  the  agricultural  interest,  now 
in  a  pitiful  condition,  which  demands  our  sympathy,  has  been  led  to  hope  that 
it  can  find  therein  the  means  of  bettering  its  existence. 

Of  course  Mr.  Scholz  being  a  minister  of  finance  puts  on  a  brave 
front  as  a  gold  monometallist,  but  he  said  of  himself  that  he  was  not 
"  a  fanatical  advocate  of  the  single  gold  standard,"  and  that  he  was 
u  not  insensible  to  the  heavy  losses  which  had  been  incurred  by  the 
demonetization  of  silver."  Baron  Von  Mirbach,  (to  whom  I  have  al- 
ready referred),  a  nobleman  of  Eastern  Prussia  and  a  leading  member 
of  the  Diet,  in  an  address  to  the  people  of  Germany  entitled,  "The 
serious  injury  done  by  the  gold  standard  to  those  engaged  in  agricul- 
ture, in  the  mechanical  arts,  to  manufactures,  to  laborers,  to  all  who 
labor  with  hand  and  mind,"  says: 

The  establishment  of  the  gold  standard  in  Germany  was  a  serious  mistake, 
as  the  Chancellor  of  the  Empire  himself  has  said.  It  cost  the  country,  that  is 
the  tax-payers,  over  70,000,000  marks  (seventeen  and  a  half  million  dollars),  and 
injured  the  entire  population  that  lives  by  labor,  and  benefited  only  those  who 
had  money. 

If  Prince  Bismarck  had  not  stopped  the  further  sale  of  the  thalers  (silver)  in 
the  year  1879  we  should  have  suffered  more  than  twice  the  loss  already  borne. 

And  further: 

It  is  true  that  most  people  do  not  understand  the  monetary  question,  and 
tnls  is  so  much  to  be  lamented,  for  no  question  is  of  such  far-reaching,  practi- 


10 

cal  importance  for  the  weal  or  woe  of  all  classes  of  labor,  nay  for  the  happiness 
of  the  citizen.  It  is  much  more  important  than  the  question  of  protection,  in 
fact  than  all  the  issues  of  economic  politics,  which  are  so  much  discussed  to- 
day. If  it  were  only  understood  by  the  majority  of  the  people  they  would  raise 
a  storm  which  would  sweep  the  gold  standard  away  as  wind  sweeps  away  chaff. 

Dr,  Otto  Arendt,  secretary  of  the  "  German  association  for  the 
double  standard  under  guarantee  of  treaty,"  writes,  under  date  of 
January  12,  1886. 

We  need  both  metals.  The  equilibrium  between  them  has  been  broken  by 
the  experiment  of  the  gold  standard.  No  single  state  is  in  position  to  restore 
that  equilibrium  ;  an  international  agreement  is  necessary.  All  states  except 
England  are  ready  for  such  an  agreement  if  Germany  decides  to  join.  If  we 
leave  this  one  nation  in  its  isolation  the  monetary  problem  which  seems  so 
difficult  will  be  solved.  Future  generations  will  instance  among  the  greatest 
aberrations  of  the  human  mind  the  idea  and  the  experiment  of  the  gold  stand 
ard  which  has  brought  such  unspeakable  misery  upon  the  world. 

On  February  11  a  Reuter  telegram  from  Berlin  stated  that  the  mo- 
tion introduced  by  Herr  Huene  in  the  Reichstag  on  behalf  of  the  Con- 
servatives, urging  a  new  and  searching  inquiry  into  the  currency  ques 
tion,  with  a  view  to  ascertaining  whether  it  would  be  better  to  adhere 
to  monometallism  or  return  to  a  double  standard,  was  adopted  by  a 
vote  of  145  to  119.  The  result  is  a  step  forward  for  the  international 
bimetallists.  Gentlemen,  I  could  produce  evidence  almost  indefi- 
nitely to  show  that  Germany  is  alive  to  the  importance  of  a  settlement 
of  this  question,  and  with  a  little  more  pressure  would  be  ready  to 
agree  to  an  arrangement,  but  so  long  as  we  are  bound  by  law  to  con- 
tinue indefinitely  to  grind  out  at  least  two  millions  of  Bland  dollars 
per  month  we  greatly  retard  if  we  do  not  directly  prevent  success. 
With  one  more  quotation  from  Minister  of  Finance  Scholz  I  will  make 
no  further  reference  to  Germany. 

In  the  speech  to  wnich  I  have  already  referred  he  alluded  to  the 
-embarrasments  of  the  United  States,  from  which  he  said  with  pride, 
that  Germany  was  free  because  she  had  stopped  the  coinage  of  silver. 
Is  it  not  obvious  that  it  is  desirable  that  we  now  enter  upon  a  course 
whereby  we  may  be  relieved,  and  shift  the  embarrassment  upon  them; 
in  other  words,  allow  Germany  to  "lie  awake  nights"  over  the  silver 
question  instead  of  continuing  to  do  so  ourselves  ?  To  me  everything 
indicates  that  Germany  is  in  a  condition  where  pressure  is  sure  of  pro- 
ducing a  favorable  result. 

Turning  to  France,  I  think  I  am  safe  in  saying  that,  judging  from 
her  past  history  and  from  recent  action,  she  would  not  be  slow  to 
consent  to  enter  into  negotiations  to  establish  international  bimetal- 
lism. From  the  London  Bullionist  of  February  6  we  learn  that  an  official 
decree  had  been  promulgated  appointing  a  permanent  commission  to 
consider  the  monetary  question  in  France  and  other  countries.  I  can 
say  on  excellent  authority  that  there  is  not  a  prominent  man  in  Holland 
who  is  not  an  international  bimetallist.  The  chief  powers  comprising 
the  Latin  Union  are  France,  Belgium,  Switzerland .  and  Italy. 

Concerning  France  I  have  already  spoken.  Of  the  remaining  states 
I  can  say  without  hesitation  that  international  bimetallism  through 
guarantee  of  treaty  will  be  to  them  the  solution  of  a  serious  problem- 
Turning  to  England,  we  find  that  the  friends  of  the  double  standard 
are  waging  a  hand-to-hand  fight  with  the  advocates  of  the  gold  stand- 
ard, and  that  latterly  the  conflict  has  become  very  sharp.  On  January 
22  the  annual  meeting  of  the  "  International  Monetary  Standard  Asso- 
ciation "  was  held  in  London.  Henry  H.  Gibbs,  ex-governor  of  the 
Bank  of  England,  presided,  and  among  other  things  said,  that  "he  be- 
lieved that  the  royal  commission  (of  which  he  is  a  member)  on  the 


11 

depressed  condition  of  trade  in  Great  Britain  would  report  that  the 
present  condition  of  the  silver  question  had  an  important  bearing  on 
the  depression." 

The  meeting,  before  adjourning,  resolved  to  form  a  gold  and  sliver 
league  on  a  popular  basis.  At  Manchester,  on  the  evening  of  Febru- 
ary 16,  a  large  and  important  silver  meeting  was  held,  including  many 
members  of  Parliament  and  prominent  silver  advocates,  Mr.  Grenfell, 
ex-governor  of  the  Bank  of  England,  a  prominent  bimetallist,  de- 
nounced the  Government  for  refusing  to  answer  questions  connected 
directly  with  the  currency,  and  declared  that  the  people  had  a  right 
to  the  information  for  which  those  questions  called. 

On  the  23d  of  February  a  meeting  of  the  chambers  of  commerce  of 
Great  Britain  was  held  ar  London. 

The  meeting,  by  a  vote  nearly  unanimous — 

Resolved,  That  the  depreciation  of  silver  and  its  present  tendency  to  disuse 
as  money  are  disturbing-  trade  generally,  and  England's  Eastern  commerce  in 
particular. 

Another  resolution  adopted  contained  the  following  language  : 

We  urge  the  Government  to  unite  with  other  countries  in  an  endeavor  to 
restore  silver  to  its  former  function  as  a  legal  tender,  thereby  giving  it  a  per- 
manent instead  of  a  fluctuating  value. 

Mr.  Moreton  Frewen,  in  a  letter  to  the  Pall  Mall  Gazette,  in  Septem- 
ber, said : 

There  is  no  question  of  the  day  of  the  same  importance  to  England  as  is  the 
question  of  the  future  of  silver.  We  in  England  require  to  know  betimes 
what  action  Congress  will  take  on  this  issue.  A  fall  of  12  pence  in  the  price  of 
the  ounce  of  silver  has  contracted  the  imperial  revenue  of  India  to  the  extent 
of  some  £6,000,000  sterling,  and,  far  worse  than  even  this,  has  absolutely  dis- 
located our  commercial  relations  with  all  those  nations  which  use  silver. 

He  further  shows  that  the  suspension  of  the  coinage  by  the  United 
States  of  the  two  million  or  more  standard  dollars  per  month  would 
put  England  and  her  Indian  empire  in  a  position  of  extreme  and,  from 
our  point  of  view,  well  deserved  difficulty.  Mr.  H.  Schmidt,  in  a 
paper  entitled  "The  Future  of  Silver,"  read  before  the  Institute  of 
Bankers  in  London  on  March  18,  1885,  admitted  that  the  proposed 
suspension  of  the  Bland  act  was  chiefly  directed  at  England,  but  not 
so  much  directly  as  indirectly,  through  India,  and  that  the  immediate 
result  would  be  disastrous. 

While  I  have  no  doubt  that  we  could  force  Great  Britain  into  a 
very  awkward  position,  and  while  the  minority  party  which  favors 
the  remonetization  of  silver  is  very  active  and  aggressive,  yet  her 
people  as  a  whole  are  extremely  conservative;  and  the  effort  might 
prove  unsuccessful.  International  bimetallism  can  be  accomplished, 
however,  without  England,  for  it  existed  without  her  from  181G,  when 
she  demonetized  silver,  until  1871.  It  was  then  that  Germany  began 
her  attack  upon  silver  in  endeavoring  to  follow  the  example  of  Eng- 
land, and  became  a  gold  single-standard  country. 

This  brief  review  of  the  state  of  opinion  in  Europe  shows  that  the 
scheme  of  getting  the  nations  to  agree  upon  the  measure  of  mutual 
benefit  which  the  United  States  proposed  to  them  in  1878,  and  again 
in  1881,  is  a  practical  one,  based  upon  the  enlightened  self-interest  of 
the  various*  nations  whose  agreement  is  sought.  It  shows  that  the 
obstacle  to  success  is  the  indifference,  the  dullness  and  ignorance,  of 
men  in  power  in  those  governments  ;  and,  further,  it  shows  the  prac- 
tical difficulty  of  getting  nations  to  move. 


I 


12 

Every  member  of  this  House  realizes  the  difficulties  of  getting  laws 
enacted,  or  of  getting  the  Departments  or  the  Executive  head  of  the 
Government  to  do  something  new,  something  out  of  the  ordinary 
course,  and  particularly  if  that  something  implies  that  there  has  been 
a  blunder  which  will  be  shown  by  a  change  in  the  plan  of  action. 
You,  gentlemen,  should  be  the  first  to  recognize  the  practical  diffi- 
culty of  which  I  speak.  You  know  that  nations  move  slowly,  follow- 
ing in  the  rear  of  an  enlightened  public  sentiment.  You,  of  all  others, 
ought  to  be  able  to  see  that  what  these  high  officials  need  in  order  to 
;et  them  to  move  faster  is  to  be  shaken  up.  They  need  to  be  brought 
ace  to  face  with  their  responsibilities  in  the  eyes  of  all  the  world, 
and  the  opportunity  ought  not  to  be  afforded  of  seeking  refuge  behind 
a  pretext  of  any  character,  no  matter  how  adroit  it  may  apparently  be. 
Now,  gentlemen,  the  measure  which  I  advocate  will  accomplish 
this  result  in  every  nation  in  Europe.  A  date  fixed  by  us  for  suspen- 
sion of  the  coinage  of  the  standard  dollar,  unless  there  shall  be  inter- 
national concurrence  before  this  specified  time,  is  a  summons  left  in 
the  hands  of  every  European  statesman  who  has  any  responsibility  to 
his  country,  to  his  sovereign,  or  to  his  constituents — a  summons 
which  he  cannot  forget  or  ignore — to  wake  up  and  take  hold  of  this 
question,  in  order  to  bring  about  its  settlement  upon  the  only  basis 
which  can  possibly  be  permanent  and  satisfactory,  the  basis  of  inter- 
national bimetalism  through  treaty  agreement  to  open  mints  to  the 
free  coinage  of  silver  at  an  established  ratio  to  gold. 

I  shall  devote  the  remainder  of  my  time  to  some  of  the  arguments 
of  my  opponents. 

The  honorable  member  from  Ohio  [Mr.  Warner],  in  his  remarks 
upon  this  floor,  quoted  Pliny  as  saying  that  "  gold  was  a  curse."  In 
Article  X,  on  "National  Problems,"  he  also  quotes  from  the  same 
writer  and  uses  the  following  language  : 

Pliny  speaks  of  the  introduction  of  the  gold  denarius  as  a  ''crime  com- 
mitted against  the  welfare  of  mankind."  If  the  introduction  of  gold  coins 
into  the  Roman  republic  was  for  the  purpose  of  increasing  the  money  stan- 
dard, then  the  denunciation  of  Pliny  was  not  unmerited. 

Mr.  Speaker,  I  take  it  that  every  member  has  heard  of  Pliny,  and 
has  a  wholesome  respect  for  an  ancient  Roman  who  could  so  far 
triumph  over  the  ravages  of  time  as  to  transmit  an  anti  "  gold  bug  " 
message  to  the  Forty-ninth  Congress,  in  a  land  that  was  not  heard  of 
until  fourteen  hundred  years  after  his  death.  I  can  imagine  a  "  gold- 
bug"  writhing  under  the  application  of  Pliny,  and  I  see  the  con- 
stituencies of  silver  rejoicing  over  the  unexpected  reinforcement 
which  they  owe  to  the  learning  of  the  honorable  gentleman  from 
Ohio.  It  is,  however,  my  painful  duty  to  tell  the  honorable  gentle- 
man that  "all  that  glitters  is  not  gold."  Information  is  great,  but 
accuracy  is  greater. 

I  hold  in  my  hand  a  copy  of  the  works  of  the  aforesaid  Pliny,  and  I 
find  him  on  page  111,  volume  6,  talking  of  "  silver  ore  as  another  folly 
of  mankind." 

The  melancholy  fact  is  that  the  gentleman  did  not  read  far  enough. 
This  great  Roman  whom  he  has  seen  fit  to  throw  at  our  heads  was  not 
an  anti-gold  man  or  an  anti -silver  man;  he  was  an  anti-money  man. 
He  believed  in  barter:  he  objected  to  money;  and  his  reasoning  was 
excellent.  He  objected  to  men's  spending  time  in  digging  after  money 
when  they  ought  to  have  been  digging  after  chemicals  and  drugs.  He 
was  writing  a  book  on  natural  history,  and  he  was  a  medical  enthusi- 
ast and  spared  nothing  in  his  praise  of  medical  knowledge.  His  idea 
was  that  men  should  be  searching:  for  remedies  to  cure  diseases  rather 


13 

than  to  be  spending  their  time  in  making  iron  for  swords,  or  mining 
silver  and  gold  for  luxury  and  treasure. 

But,  gentlemen,  I  am  not  here  to  vindicate  Pliny,  nor  to  pick  flaws 
in  the  literary  productions  of  the  member  from  Ohio,  but  I  stand  before 
you  to  bear  testimony  to  the  fact  that  the  entire  argument  of  the  ad- 
vocates of  the  standard  silver  dollar  rests  upon  flimsy  foundations.  It 
will  not  pass  inspection;  it  is  bound  to  break  down.  The  same  inac- 
curacy which  I  find  in  this  citation  from  Pliny  goes  through  the  entire 
argument  of  the  extreme  silver  men. 

T"ake,  for  example,  the  minority  report  on  the  bill  (II.  R.  5690)  now 
before  the  House,  signed  by  Mr.  Bland,  Mr.  Lanham,  and  Mr.  By- 
num.  I  find  on  page  10  a  statement  about  the  various  countries  of  the 
world  and  their  money.  Here  is  a  list  of  gold  standard  countries — 
countries  where  this  metal  is  the  standard  money,  where  any  owner  of 
gold  bullion  can  take  it  o  the  mint  and  get  it  turned  into  money  at 
par. 

Below  is  a  list  of  silver  standard  countries  where  silver  has  a  like 
position.  Then  comes  a  list  of  double-standard  countries,  where  one 
would  suppose  that  gold  and  silver  were  the  standard,  and  where  the 
owner  of  gold  or  silver  bullion  could  get  it  coined  into  money  at  par. 
Among  others  the  United  States  of  America  is  down  as  being  a  double- 
standard  country.  How  is  this  ?  Can  any  owner  of  silver  bullion  take 
it  to  our  mints  and  get  it  coined  at  all,  or,  in  fact  could  he  go  to  any  of 
the  important  countries  in  that  list  with  his  silver  and  get  it  coined  into 
money  at  par?  No;  of  course  not;  so  here  is  a  false  statement,  as  I 
look  at  it.  Can  any  one  maintain  that  that  statement  is  not  meant  to 
mislead  ?  But  where  did  that  statement  originate  ?  It  comes  from  the 
report  of  the  Silver  Commission  of  1876,  printed  the  following  year, 
before  the  enactment  of  the  Bland  law  in  1878,  and  when  gold  was  the 
standard  of  value  and  sole  full  metallic  money.  The  statement  is  mis- 
leading to-day;  it  was  more  misleading  in  1877. 

France  is  in  the  list  as  being  a  double  standard  country;  Belgium, 
Italy,  Switzerland,  the  Latin  Union,  which  stopped  the  coinage  of  sil- 
ver on  private  account  in  1874  and  stopped  it  on  government  account 
in  1878.  France  a  double-standard  country,  when  it  is  ten  years  since 
she  has  coined  silver  !  Holland  has  coined  none  since  1875.  It  is  char- 
itable to  suppose  that  the  men  who  prepared  that  statement  in  1876 
were  asleep,  and  that  they  thought  every  one  else  was  asleep.  Such 
misrepresentation  of  facts  as  these  are  all  made  in  one  interest.  The 
report  of  1877  was  made  in  that  same  interest.  The  very  basis  of  the 
argument  of  this  interest  is  full  of  fallacies. 

Why,  gentlemen,  if  this  table  gave  a  true  picture  of  the  monetary 
condition  of  the  commercial  nations  we  should  not  be  arguing  this 
question  in  this  House  at  this  time,  for  we  should  not  have  any  "  silver 
question"  on  our  hands.  The  standard  dollar  would  be  worth  a  dol- 
lar and  three  cents,  instead  of  eighty;  in  fact,  it  is  a  question  whether 
the  trade-dollars  and  the  standard  dollars  would  not  go  to  the  melting 
pot  to  be  sold  as  bullion  to  be  exported  to  the  double- standard  coun- 
tries, where  it  could  be  converted  into  money  at  the  ratio  of  15^  to  1. 

If  the  Latin  Union  and  Holland  were  true  double-standard  countries, 
as  the  table  represents — that  is,  if  silver  could  be  taken  to  their  mints 
and  coined  into  money  at  the  ratio  of  15£  to  1 — we  should  practically 
be  in  the  condition  we  were  in  before  the  war,  a  double-standard 
country,  but  with  gold  alone  flowing  to  our  mints  for  free  coinage.  You 
can  see  why  it  was  worth  while  for  an  attorney  of  the  silver  interest  to 

Erepare  such  a  table ;  it  is  misleading  and  calculated  to  deceive,  whether 
itentionally  or  through  error  I  leave  to  you  to  decide.    Whoever  places 
any  reliance  upon  it  gets  a  distorted  view  of  the  situation.     It  ignores 


14 

the  main  facts  that  every  one  should  know  who  has  to  deal  with  the 
silver  question. 

I  appeal  to  my  friends  on  the  Committee  on  Coinage,  Weights,  and 
Measures,  who  signed  the  minority  report,  to  expunge  that  table  from 
said  report.  I  suggest  to  those  gentlemen  who  have  published  it  in 
their  speeches  to  add  a  postscript,  or  to  follow  them,  as  they  have  been 
sent  out,  with  a  circular  letter  to  this  effect:  "  Error  corrected.  In- 
stead of  double-standard  countries,  as  published  in  my  speech,  please 
read  countries  which  were  once  double-standard  countries  but  which 
are  no  longer  such  as  they  coin  only  gold." 

Then  follows  the  list  of  countries;  after  which  add,  "These  countries 
hold  more  silver  than  the  United  States  holds  of  gold  and  silver  to- 
gether, and  if  Mr.  Bland's  bill  should  become  a  law  these  countries 
may  be  expected  to  send  silver  sufficient  to  buy  up  all  of  our  gold  and 
leave  us  with  the  silver  standard.  In  any  case,  this  measure  would  ruin 
the  prospects  of  international  bimetallism." 

For  ten  years  the  agitators  for  immoderate  coinage  here  have  held 
out  this  prospect  to  the  gold  men  of  Europe,  and  so  have  helped  to  pre- 
vent the  success  of  bimetallism.  These  agitators  for  immoderate  coin- 
age are  the  men  who  have  done  most  to  keep  down  the  price  of  the  pro- 
ducts of  the  West  and  South.  Here  is  something  which  my  friends 
Bland,  Lanham,  McCreary,  Laffoon,  and  Clements,  of  the  House, 
and  Mr.  Jones,  of  the  Senate  should  have  pasted  upon  their  speeches 
and  reports.  If  they  do  not  do  it  themselves  some  one  must  do  it  for 
them. 

Gentlemen,  this  line  of  tactics  is  not  confined  to  this  House,  but  it 
has  invaded  the  Senate,  spreading  itself  upon  eight  columns  of  the  Rec- 
ord; I  allude  to  the  memorial  of  an  association  which  is  called  the 
National  Bimetallic  Coinage  Association.  The  true  object  of  this  as- 
sociation is  the  immediate  sale  of  silver  through  inducing  the  repre- 
tatives  of  the  West  and  South  to  sacrifice  their  real  interests  to  the  im- 
agined interests  of  silver  States.  Senator  Jones,  of  Nevada,  intro- 
duced this  memorial  on  March  11.  We  find  in  it  the  same  erroneous 
statement. 

I  read  from  the  Congressional  Record  of  the  11th  instant: 

THE  FALLACY,  *4  DUMPING-GROUND  FOB  SILVER." 

With  the  re-establishment  of  the  free  coinage  of  silver  in  this  country  we 
have  been  told  that  the  United  States  will  become  the  dumping-ground  for 
foreign  silver.  This  assertion  manifestly  rests  on  error,  and  a  review  of  the 
rates  of  coinage  of  the  several  leading  nations  in  this  world  will  soon  dispel 
all  just  grounds  for  such  apprehension.  On  the  contrary,  with  the  free  coinage 
of  silver  re-established  in  this  and  other  silver-using  countries  in  Europe  we 
shall  be  confronted  with  a  drain  upon  us  for  our  silver  dollars.  Our  coinages 
and  that  of  Mexico  are  as  1  to  16,  which  means  we  gives  16  pounds  of  silver  for 
every  pound  of  gold.  The  Latin  Union,  on  the  contrary,  coins  at  the  rate  of  1 
to  1534 ;  Great  Britain  in  respect  to  subsidiary  coinage  as  1  to  14.28.  The  Ger- 
man Empire  as  well  as  all  the  other  nai  ions  of  South  and  Central  America  coin 
as  1  to  15/3 ,  hence  the  loss  on  their  coins  would  alone  prohibit  the  exportation 
of  their  silver  to  this  country.  So  far  as  Mexico  with  her  standard  of  1  to  16, 
equal  to  our  own,  is  concerned,  we  have  no  reason  to  apprehend  any  injurious 
importation  of  her  silver. 

Please  observe,  gentlemen,  that  the  Latin  Union  coins  and  that  the 
German  Empire  coins.  Gentleman,  as  I  have  already  shown,  the 
German  Empire  ceased  coining  silver  in  1871,  Holland  in  1875,  France 
and  her  allies  in  1876;  hence,  they  are  no  longer  double- stand- 
ard countries;  therefore  this  statement  is  misleading,  it  is  incor- 
rect. Those  countries  are  no  longer  double-standard  countries.  #  No 
one  can  take  silver  to  the  mints  of  those  countries  and  have  it  coined 


15 

as  they  can  gold,  they  are  single- standard  countries.  And  the  memo- 
rial contains  other  equally  fallacious  statements. 

I  ask  all  candid  men  if  I  am  not  warranted  in  finding  evidence  of  a 
conspiracy  of  silver  men  to  deceive  the  people  and  to  mislead  their 
representatives  in  Congress.  The  Silver  Commission  of  1876  and  1877, 
minority  report  of  the  Committee  on  Coinage,  Weights  and  Measures 
of  this  Congress,  and  the  memorial  just  alluded  to  all  pervert  facts 
upon  the  silver  question.  What  does  it  mean  ?  It  means  a  good  many 
things,  but  among  others,  and  an  important  one  to  the  silver  mine 
owners,  it  means  a  market  for  their  production.  They  want  to  sell 
their  silver;  they  claim  protection  from  the  Government;  in  fact, 
it  has  occurred  to  me  that  it  would  be  cheaper  for  the  people  if  the 
Government  did  protect  them  by  paying  a  subsidy  to  the  mine  owners 
rather  than  by  pursuing  the  present  unfortunate  policy. 

In  my  judgment  the  silver  mine  owners  have  gone  too  far;  they 
have  overestimated  themselves.  If  they  had  been  more  modest  in  their 
claims  they  would  have  realized  more  than  they  have  done.  It  was 
their  fortune  to  have  their  private  interests  tied  fast  to  one  of  the  great 
interests  of  mankind,  and  they  were  so  elated  that  they  began  to  think 
they  could  control  the  monetary  interests  of  the  country,  The  silver 
men  are  trying  to  run  the  silver  question,  and  the  most  they  have  done 
is  to  do  harm  to  the  cause  of  silver.  Alas,  for  silver,  if  it  only  had 
such  friends  as. these. 

Now,  gentlemen,  let  us  take  another  long  look  at  the  principal  facts 
that  concern  the  past,  the  present  and  the  future  of  silver.  These  facts 
are,  that  down  to  a  few  years  ago  a  combination  of  the  chief  nations 
coined  all  the  silver  that  was  offered  at  the  mints  at  a  fixed  ratio  to 
gold,  which  combination  was  broken  up  in  the  manner  I  have  ex- 
plained This  Government  started  a  movement  to  get  the  nations  to 
combine  in  restoring  silver.  That  work  is  now  in  progress.  It  is  in 
the  hands  of  its  friends  in  Europe  who  are  working  their  way  toward 
success.  They  ask  our  help;  they  ask  us  not  to  weaken  them  by  con- 
tinuing our  coinage  at  the  ratio  of  1G  to  1. 

And  now  comes  the  same  old  cry  for  free  and  unlimited  silver  coin- 
age, which  from  the  beginning  has  encouraged  the  gold  men  of  Eu- 
rope to  hold  firm  in  the  position  they  have  taken.  Gentlemen,  I  ap- 
peal to  the  sober  second  thought  of  this  House  to  stifle  this  cry,  which 
is  really,  though  its  authors  may  not  know  it,  treason  to  the  true  in- 
terests of  the  country. 

Gentlemen,  this  country  is  for  bi-metallism;  it  is  for  the  restoration 
of  silver  to  its  former  rights  side  by  side  with  gold,  rights  which  it 
had  and  which  were  guaranteed  by  international  concert,  and  which 
shall  be  given  and  guaranteed  by  international  concert  again.  The 
country,  I  say,  is  for  an  international  ratio.  This  country  is  not  in 
favor  of  a  local  ratio. 

Let  me  tell  my  colleague  on  the  committee  [Mr.  Bland]  that  we 
are  neither  red  Indians  nor  Chinese;  that  this  ratio  of  16,  or  more  cor- 
rectly 15,988,  on  which  the  piesent  dollar  is  coined  is  not  a  "  totem" 
nor  "  medicine  "  nor  a  little  "  joss  "  to  our  people.  What  they  wan^ 
is  to  see  silver  as  good  as  gold,  and  no  local  ratio  can  accomplish  that 
result.  The  ratio  of  16  to  1,  and  free  coinage,  means  the  silver  stand- 
ard. I  congratulate  the  three  members  of  the  minority  who  signed 
the  minority  report  that  they  have  been  frank  in  saying  that  they  "see 
no  harm  in  coming  to  a  single  silver  standard." 

Now,  Mr.  Speaker,  this  country  does  not  want  the  single  silver 
standard.  The  people  will  not  have  it .  The  only  reason  why  they  toler- 
ate the  existing  coinage  of  silver  is  because  they  have  not  fully  under- 


16 

stood  the  question .  Error  has  been  spread  abroad  throughout  the  land, 
and  the  Government  Printing  Office  is  being  further  used  for  its  dis- 
semination. It  is  time  to  call  a  halt,  and  I  appeal  to  all  men  who  care 
for  the  best  interest  of  the  people  to  unite  in  an  effort  to  suspend  com- 
pulsory coinage  and  for  the  accomplishment  of  international  bi-metal- 
Jlsm.     [Great  applause.] 


ADDITIONAL  REMARKS 

OF 

HON.    DARWIN    R.    JAMES, 

OF  NEW  YORK, 
IN  THE  HOUSE  OF  REPRESENTATIVES,  APRIL  2,  1886. 


Mr.  Speaker.  I  desire  to  add  to  my  remarks  of  March  20, 1880. 

The  following  lines  are  a  part  of  the  platform  of  the  Republican 
Convention  of  the  State  of  New  York,  adopted  at  Saratoga,  Septem- 
ber 23,  1885: 

"  The  restoration  of  silver  to  its  former  position  through  equality 
with  gold  before  the  law  in  a  majority  of  commercial  nations  must 
remain,  until  accomplished,  the  chief  aim  of  our  monetary  policy.'' 

The  platform  adopted  by  the  Democratic  Convention  at  Saratoga* 
September  25,  contains  recognition  of  the  same  idea: 

"But  we  will  welcome  any  practical  measure  of  agreement  with 
other  nations  by  which  the  ratio  of  value  between  gold  and  silver  may 
be  made  less  fluctuating." 

From.  Annual  Report  op  the  Secretary  op  the  Treasury  (Mr. 
Sherman)  on  the  state  op  the  finances  por  the  year  1879. 
The^  Secretary  cannot  too  strongly  urge  the  importance  of  adjusting 
the  coinage  ratio  of  the  two  metals  by  treaties  with  commercial  na- 
tions, and,  until  this  can  be  done,  of  limiting  the  coinage  of  the  silver 
dollar  to  such  a  sum  as,  in  the  opinion  of  Congress,  would  enable  the 
Department  to  readily  maintain  the  standard  dollars  of  gold  andsilver 
at  par  with  each  other. 


From  Annual  Report  of  the  Secretary  op  the  Treasury  (Mr. 

Sherman)  on  the  state  op  the  finances  for  the  year  1880. 

It  may  be  better  for  Congress  at  the  present  time  to  confine  its  action 
to  the  suspension  of  the  coinage  of  the  silver  dollar,  and  to  await  ne- 
gotiations with  foreign  powers  for  the  adoption  of  an  international 
ratio.        »*♦##*###** 


From  Annual  Report  of  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  (Mr. 

FOLGER)  ON  THE  STATE  OF  THE  FINANCES  FOR  THE  YEAR  1881. 

The  most  potential  means  of  bringing  about  any  concert  of  action 
among  different  nations  would  appear  to  be  for  the  United  States  to 
suspend,  for  the  present,  the  further  coinage  of  silver  dollars.  This  is 
the  decided  opinion  in  both  France  and  America,  of  the  highest  au- 
thorities on  bi  metallism,  and  of  those  who  wish  to  bring  silver  into 
general  use  and  raise  its  value  ;  and  it  is  believed  that  a  cessation  of 
coinage  would,  at  a  very  early  day,  bring  about  a  satisfactory  consid- 
eration of  the  whole  subject  among  the  chief  commercial  nation*. 

(The  recommendations  of  the  Secretary  were  repeated  by  reference 
in  his  report*  for  1882  and  for  1888.) 


18 

From  annual  report  of  thb  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  (Mr. 

mccullocn)  on  the  state  of  the  finances  for  the  year  1884. 

The  United  States  is  one  of  the  most  powerful  nations— its  credit 
is  high,  resources  limitless;  but  it  cannot  prevent  a  depreciation  of 
silver  unless  its  efforts  are  aided  by  leading  nations  in  Europe.  If  the 
coinage  of  silver  is  continued  in  despite  of  the  action  of  Germany  in 
demonetizing  it  and  the  limitation  of  its  coinage  by  what  are  known  as 
the  Latin  nations,  there  can  be  but  one  result;  silver  will  practically 
become  the  standard  of  value.         ****#* 

The  European  nations  which  hold  large  amounts  of  silver  must 
sooner  or  later  come  to  its  rescue,  and  the  suspension  of  coinage  in 
the  United  States  would  do  much  to  bring  about,  on  their  part,  ac- 
tion in  its  favor. 


From  annual  report  of  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  (Mr. 
Manning)  on  the  state  of  the  finances  for  the  year  1885. 

The  choice  before  Congress  is  not  between  silver  monometallism 
and  gold  monometallism.  Both  are  inadmissible.  The  choice  be- 
fore Congress  is  not  between  bimetallism  and  either  gold  or  silver 
monometallism.  The  latter  are  not  admissible,  and  bimetallism  is 
only  possible  with  the  co-operation  of  other  nations,  which  is  not  now 
to  be  had.  For,  although  France  holds  the  same  friendly  attitude, 
and  would  be  followed  by  some  of  her  associates  of  the  Latin  Union, 
England  now,  as  in  1878  and  1881,  is  willing  to  depart  from  her  mint- 
age of  gold  alone  into  coins  of  unlimited  legal  tender,  and  Germany 
now,  as  in  1881,  regards  the  concurrence  of  England  in  an  interna- 
tional bimetallic  union  as  a  sine  qua  non.         *         *         *         * 

The  only  choice  before  Congress,  therefore,  is  the  choice  between 
one  metallism  and  two-metal lism.  The  silver  dollar  cannot  be  kept 
in  equivalence  with  the  gold  dollar  if  the  coinage  of  silver  continues. 
The  gold  dollar  cannot  be  kept  in  full  domestic  circulation  if  the  silver 
dollar  is  suffered  to  fall.  Coining  more  necessitates  its  fall.  Doubt- 
less some  may  hope  that  more  silver  dollars  can  be  coined,  and  yet 
their  equivalence  with  the  monetary  unit  not  be  lost.  It  is  respect- 
fully submitted  that  there  is  no  compensation  for  that  risk,  and  that  a 
judgment  so  accordant  of  the  great  business  classes  who  carry  on  the 
exchanges  of  the  country  must  be  accepted  as  a  final  estimate  of  that 
risk. 

Nor  should  it  be  forgotten  that  every  silver  dollar  coined  hereafter 
at  our  present  ratio  would  be,  as  the  coining  of  every  silver  dollar 
since  1878  has  been,  a  direct  hindrance  to  the  international  bimetallic 
union  then  avowed  as  the  object  of  our  legislative  policy. 

Extract  from  House  Ex.  Doc.  No.  100.  49th  Congress,  1st  Ses- 
sion. Letter  from  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  to  the 
Speaker  of  the  House  of  Representatives  in  response  to  a 
resolution  of  the  House,  etc.,  March  2d,  1886. 

It  is  now  become  plain,  to  all  who  take  comprehensive  and  practical 
views  of  public  policy,  that  the  United  States  can  do  no  better  than 
return  at  the  earliest  possible  date  to  a  bimetallic  unit  of  value.  By 
this  I  mean — 

1.  The  monetary  unit  embodied  in  coins,  both  of  silver  and  of  gold. 

2.  The  monetary  unit  of  value  embodied  in  the  silver  coin  to  be 
made  and  kept  in  that  successive  and  simultaneous  equivalence  with 
the  present  and  prior  unit  of  value  which  has  been  our  honorable  dis- 
tinction ever  since  the  Constitution  was  framed. 

8.  Open  mints  for  the  free  coinage  of  gold  and  silver  at  a  fixed  ratio, 
to  every  citizen  of  the  United  States  bringing  either  metal,  and  the 


19 

right  to  have  his  coins  received  in  every  sale  and  payment  a*  full  legal 
tender  dollars. 

Nothing  less  than  this  is  bimetallism.  It  is  not  bimetallism  that  we 
are  having  now.  All  out  silver  coinage  is  but  excessive  subsidiary 
coinage  of  Treasury  purchases  of  silver  for  a  fictitious  Treasury  profit. 
We  lack  an  indispensable  part  of  bimetallism.  We  lack  the  free  coin- 
age of  everybody's  silver,  to  an  amount  unlimited  by  Government,  into 
coins  of  full  legal  tender.  We  only  maintain  a  free  coinage  for  every- 
body's gold,  to  an  amount  unlimited  by  Government,  into  coins  of  full 
legal  tender. 

It  is  the  facts  of  our  present  situation,  I  would  respectfully  reassert, 
that  constrain  us  toward  bimetallism  as  our  goal. 

Our  $550,000,000  coined  gold,  our  $220,000,000  coined  silver,  now 
make  any  policy  save  ultimate  bimetallism  for  the  United  States,  prac- 
tically and  politically  a  Utopian  policy. 

Stopping  the  coinage  of  Treasury  purchases  of  silver  is  not  »  policy 
in  which  we  can  rest  and  be  thankful.  It  is  merely  the  first  and 
indispensable  step  to  ultimate  bimetallism.  It  is  also  the  only  step  to 
ultimate  bimetallism.  No  intelligent  expert  on  either  side  the  At- 
lantic has  proposed  or  attempted  to  defend  any  other  step  to  ultimate 
bin  etallism. 

It  is  a  wise  step  in  the  interest  of  industries  jeoparded  by  doubt,  to 
end  the  increasing  risk  of  expelling  our  gold.  But  it  is  a  step  neces 
sary  in  the  interest  of  silver  owners,  because  continued  silver-dollar 
coinage,  after  long  trial,  neither  betters  the  price  of  silver  nor  narrows 
its  fluctuations,  and  tends  to  prevent  rather  than  promote  that  inter- 
national concert  which,  by  restoring  open  mints  for  silver  in  three  or 
more  great  commercial  nations,  can  alone  restore  its  price.  No  mint 
in  the  world  which  gives  free  coinage  to  gold  now  gives  free  coinage 
to  silver.  Except  our  own,  no  mint  in  the  world  which  give  free  coin- 
age to  gold  now  coins  full  legal  tender  silver.  We  alone  heap  up  the 
load.  The  sure  outcome  is  silver  monometallism  for  us.  Meanwhile 
what  good  has  eight  years  of  it  done  the  silver  owners  ?  Not  a  dollar 
of  their  coin  or  bullion  crosses  the  sea  and  there  brings  its  former 
price.  But  silver  monometallism  in  the  United  States  will  not  restore 
silver  to  its  old  price  any  mor<  than  the  sileer  monometallism  of  India, 
China,  and  Mexico  do.  It  will  not  even  tend  to  restore  silver  to  its 
old  price,  and  so  is  condemned  as  an  incapat  le,  unprofitable  monetary 
policy.  In  that  respect,  it  is  worse  than  our  present  limited  coinage 
of  Treasury  purchases,  prior  to  the  day  of  their  outcome  in  silver 
monometallism.  It  is  even  worse  for  the  ultimate  price  of  silver 
than  if  we  stopped  such  coinage  and  held  on  so,  indefiniteL  .  The 
reason  is  plain.  Silver  monometallism  in  the  United  States,  in  due 
time,  and  finally,  will  release  to  Europe  the  bulk  of  our  $550,000,000 
gold,  and  assist  every  once  bimetallic  nation  there  to  follow  Great 
Britain  and  the  Scandinavian  States  in  becoming  and  remaining  a 
gold  monometallic  nation,  with  but  token  silver  for  small  change. 

Silver  monometallism  in  the  United  States,  in  due  time  and  finally, 
will  release  the  depreciated  full  legal-tender  silver  of  European  bi- 
metallic nations  to  compete  with  the  product  of  our  own  mines  for  a 
passage  through  our  mints.  Assume  that  we  could  exclude  it  by 
stringent  laws — though  it  is  a  strange  assumption— foreign  silver 
would  distance  ours  in  the  race  for  the  Orient,  with  which  we  trade 
mostly  through  Europe  now,  and  with  which  we  have  so  little  trade, 
but  Europe  so  much. 

The  transfer  and  exchange  of  a  part  of  Europe's  silver  stock  for 
the  bulk  of  the  United  States  gold  stock  might  be  indirect  in  p*rt, 


20 

but  it  would  be  unavoidable.  The  open  mint  for  silver  in  Franco 
was  all  that  Germany  used  or  needed  to  effect  the  substitution  of  her 
silver  for  the  gold  or  Prance.  That  is  what  silver  monometallism  in 
the  United  States  would  at  last  come  to,  undeniably — the  exchange  of 
European  silver  against  American  gold ;  and  that  could  not  raise 
the  ratio  of  silver  to  its  old  level,  but  would  fasten  it  down  finally. 

Even  were  this  indirect  but  ultimate  exchange  of  our  gold  for  Eu- 
ropean silver  hindered  by  any  present  tendency  of  coin  balances  to 
continue  in  our  favor,  it  is  still  but  an  affair  of  time.  There  are  other 
arguments,  too  complex  to  be  met  incidentally  ;  but  whatever  their 
force,  the  disuse  of  gold  by  the  United  States  would  be  compensated 
by  its  increased  use  in  Europe,  and  thus  prevent  its  loss  of  purchasing 
power.  So  our  increased  use  of  silver,  tending  to  enhance  its  purchas- 
ing power,  would  be  countervailed  without  benefit  to  the  United  States, 
by  its  diminished  use  in  European  nations,  thus  preventing  its  gain  of 
purchasing  power,  whether  their  legal-tender  silver  stocks  were 
drained  off  to  the  West  or  East.  The  bimetallic  theory  of  an  ever* 
balancing  approximation  of  the  two  metals  to  a  fixed  ratio,  whatever 
the  variations  in  the  natural  increase  from  mines  of  either  metal,  has 
no  application  to  the  case  of  substitution  here  supposed,  any  more  than 
it  had  to  the  substitution  which  Germany  effected  at  the  expense  of 
Prance.  The  emigration  of  our  gold  to  Europe  would  not  restore  the 
price  of  silver. 

There  is  one  way,  and  only  one,  by  which  silver  can  be  restored  to 
its  old  ratio  and  value,  namely  an  international  concert  upon  a  com- 
mon ratio  with  open  mints  to  both  metals  at  that  ratio. 

A  concert  of  European  powers  without  the  concurrence  of  the 
United  States  is  impossible,  for  this  reason.  The  ratio  of  gold  at 
which  most  of  the  European  silver  stocks  have  coined  is  15.5:1.  Our 
ratio  is  16:1.  A  merely  European  concert  of  nations  would  make 
profitable  the  export  of  all  our  silver,  and  we  should  be  drained  of  the 
metal  as  we  were,  by  the  same  difference  of  ratios,  from  1834  onward, 
when  our  loss  induced  in  1853  our  first  subsidiaiy  coinage  of  fractional 
silver. 

A  concert  of  the  European  powers  together  with  the  United  States, 
until  we  stop  coining  silver,  is  impossible  for  the  same  and  another 
reason.  It  is  impossible  while  ratios  differ,  and  while  we  persist  in 
that  which  is  not  only  different,  but  which  would  both  drain  us  of  all 
except  fractional  silver,  and  inundate  them  with  our  coined  $220,000,- 
000  and  whole  future  annual  product.  But  moreover  the  step  is  one 
which  no  European  nation,  now  loaded  with  a  depreciated  but  full 
tender  silver  coinage,  will  consent  to  take  while  the  direct  or  indirect 
substitution  of  European  silver  for  the  United  States  gold  seems  a  pos- 
sibility, even  a  remote  one.  It  is  perceived  to  be  a  near  possibility 
under  the  continuing  operation  of  our  present  laws,  by  those  who  con- 
trol, with  firm  hand,  the  monetary  policy  of  foreign  powers. 

So  long  as  we  do  not  stop,  and  stop  unconditionally,  our  coinage  of 
full  legal-tender  silver,  we  cannot  destroy  foreign  hopes  of  enlarging 
their  stock  of  gold  at  our  expense.  But  I  am  equally  well  assured, 
that  when  we  do  stop,  and  stop  unconditionally,  and  destroy  such 
hopes,  such  an  international  concert  as  I  have  described  will  then  be- 
come possible.  The  situation  of  bimetallic  European  nations  will  then 
be  no  better  than  ours,  and,  for  the  first  time  since  the  fall  in  value  of 
their  full  legal-tender  silver,  will  offer  no  other  remedy  or  outcome 
than  an  agreement,  with  suitable  precautions,  upon  open  mints  at  a 
fixed  and  common  ratio,  to  which  the  assent  of  the  United  States  would 
be  indisoensable. 


Ji 


